In the Press TV video above, I join the celebrations as Mosul – birthplace of ISIS’s false flag “caliphate” – is liberated. And in the article below, Pakistani physics professor Mujahid Kamran deconstructs the history of chemical weapons false flags in Syria. As the Qur’an tells us:
And say: “Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” (17:81)
THE CONTROVERSY REGARDING USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS IN SYRIA: 2013-2017
July 13. 2017
“The only reason Muslim terrorism exists is that Washington created it. Washington first used jihadism against the Soviet army in Afghanistan. Then against Gaddafi in Libya. Then when Obama’s plan to invade Syria on the trumped-up chemical weapons charge was blocked by the UK Parliament and Russia, Obama sent ISIS to overthrow Assad. General Flynn, who was the director of the US Defence Intelligence Agency stated this matter-of-factly on Al Jazeera. Flynn said it was a “wilful decision” of the Obama administration to send ISIS to overthrow Assad. This is why Russia’s hopes of a common front against ISIS never made any sense. Jihadism is Washington’s best weapon with which to destabilize Russia. Why would Washington help Russia to defeat this weapon?” – Paul Craig Roberts
We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them on targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force . . .. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under. – Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld
On June 30, 2017 the OPCW (Organisation for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) released its report on the April 4, 2017 Khan Shaykhun incident where allegedly the Syrians used chemical weapons . The report “confirmed that people were exposed to sarin, a chemical weapon.” The report, however, did not pin the responsibility of the use of sarin gas on any one. Does this mean that there was no or insufficient evidence to hold the Syrian government responsible? Or does it mean that the OPCW let the Western and Israeli backed “rebels” off the hook? Had there been the slightest of evidence of Bashar al Assad’s guilt, would the OPCW have avoided mentioning it? OPCW itself had provided a certificate of clearance to Assad in 2015 – the OPCW had destroyed all stocks of chemical weapons in Syria. So where did the sarin come from? The report was attacked by the alternative media almost within no time. Stephen Lendman called it a “shameful” report . The Syrian government issued a rebuttal calling the OPCW report :
“a fabricated and contrived narrative that has no credibility and cannot be accepted in any manner, because it is removed from logic, and is concocted by a twisted imagination that only thinks about weaving conspiracies and about ways to raise the collapsing morale of terrorist groups following the achievements made by the Syrian Arab Army and its allies on the Syrian ground.”
In view of the gravity of the situation one must look at the entire sequence of charges and counter-charges dispassionately and by going back in time, place things in context, and then arrive at a conclusion based on facts, proper perspective and analysis, and not on emotion whipped and stirred by the corporate owned mainstream media and by those who want war at all costs. The Zionist control of media that it owns is at its peak in the U.S. and the U.K. In fact, things have come to such a pass that a journalist of the calibre of Seymour Hersch, who incidentally is Jewish, was unable to file his outstanding investigative report on the April 4, 2017 incident in any American or British media outlet. He had to file his story in a German magazine . Based on his extensive intelligence and insider contacts he was able to state that the US intelligence and military had repeatedly told Trump that Syrians had used a conventional bomb and had not used a chemical weapon. Why then did the attack on Syria take place?
In 2007 General Wesley Clark narrated the following to Amy Goodman, quoting one of the generals in the Pentagon :
“So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defence’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”
The wars in the Middle East, and the continual “Western” pressure against Syria, from attempts at regime change and fragmentation of Syria through the so called rebels backed by them, to direct involvement in case the rebels fail, are a reflection of “policy” decided by NAZIs (Neocon-American-Zionist- Imperialists), and not by the people of the U.S. or the U.K.
Who Takes Decisions and How
In order to understand who takes decisions about wars and depressions, etc. and how one has to dig deeper than what one sees in the corporate media, which is a propaganda organ of the Freemasonic/Illuminati Zionist international banking families and their subservient allies. As Douglas Reed has established in his deep and eye-opening book The Controversy of Zion, the Western leadership has sold itself to Zion since the turn of the 20th century at least. He wrote as far back as 1956 :
“How is the oracle worked? By what means has America (and the entire West) been brought to the state that no public man aspires to office, or editor feels secure at his desk, until he has brought out his prayer-mat and prostrated himself to Zion? How have presidents and prime ministers been led to compete for the approval of this faction like bridesmaid for the bride’s bouquet? Why do leading men suffer themselves to be paraded at hundred-dollar-a-plate banquets for Zion, or to be herded on to Zionist platforms to receive “plaques” for services rendered?”
The spectacle described by Douglas Reed over seven decades ago has continued at an ever increasing intensity and scale till today. The presidents of the U.S. and the prime ministers of U.K., continue to prostrate themselves before Zion as emphasised by Reed, and the armed forces of these countries do the bidding of Zionists. Zionism is a tool of the international bankers for setting up a global slave state euphemistically called the New World Order. The wars in the Middle East are wars for Zion, as were the two World Wars. The Satanic-Zionist international banking families constitute the core of Zion. There exist several important “think tanks” established by the Rothschilds in the aftermath of World War I, a war which was instigated by the Rothschilds and a few members of the British oligarchy close to the Rothschild clan . These think tanks include the Royal Institute of International Affairs as well as the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR). In 1954 the Bilderberg group was also set up. The Trilateral Commission was set up by the Rockefellers in 1973 on the advice of Zbigniew Brzezinski. These think tanks first propose, and then “decide”, on the direction of their masters, the Satanic Illuminati Zionist international bankers, when and against whom war is to be waged, which countries are to be destroyed, who will get the contracts for “rebuilding” what they first destroy, and so on. As remarked by the Dutch banker whistle blower Ronald Bernard: “All misery on earth is a business model”. This model is utterly parasitic. They are behind 9/11 and all subsequent wars that are now expanding into a possible global war involving the West led by the U.S.-U.K.-Israel alliance pitted against Russia and China.
As the great American patriot Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., former Assistant Secretary of Treasury, puts it :
“What is Syria about? Why is Washington so focused on overthrowing the elected president of Syria? What explains the sudden 21st century appearance of “the Muslim threat”? How is Washington’s preoccupation with “the Muslim threat” consistent with Washington’s wars against Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, and Assad, leaders who suppressed jihadism? What explains the sudden appearance of “the Russian threat” which has been hyped into dangerous Russophobia without any basis in fact?
The Muslim threat, the Russian threat, and the lies used to destroy Iraq, Libya, and parts of Syria are all orchestrations to serve Israeli and neoconservative aspirations.”
It was in compliance with the Zionist dictates that on April 6, 2017, exactly 100 years after the U.S. entered WW I in compliance to a commitment made by President Wilson to the Satanic-Zionist international bankers, the United States Navy launched a missile attack on Shayrat airbase in Syria. In 100 years nothing had changed – President Trump is as much a captive of the Zionists as was President Wilson a century earlier. And the unrelenting Zionist thrust towards global war and an eventual global slave state controlled by them was also the same, except that the goal of global “revolution” i.e. global subversion, had gained sudden momentum after 9/11.
Although an illegal attack by one state on another in violation of international law has no justification, the Trump government “justified” this attack by alleging that a Syrian plane or planes took off from the said airbase to drop Sarin gas on residents of Khan Shaykhun on April 4. A direct attack by one state on another in utter disregard of international law is a very grave matter and constitutes the next level in the breakdown of the laws governing the conduct of nation states with one another. Therefore, the claim of the United States government that the Syrian government launched a chemical attack on its own citizens must be analysed minutely so that it may be established that: a) the claim was true or b) the claim was false c) the claim lacked sufficient basis to be established.
There are several aspects of the matter. Firstly, there is the scientific side which can only be addressed by scientists who have expertise in the relevant area. Secondly, one must raise the question: Who benefits? Thirdly, one must place the whole event in the context of the middle-east and global policies of both, the United States-U.K.-Israel alliance and Russia, as well as China, to arrive at a clearer picture. The past conduct of the so-called rebels and who supports them also needs to be addressed. Turkish, Saudi, Iranian and Syrian interests also have to be kept in view. Further the conduct of organizations and scientists dealing with chemical weapons or engaged in propagation of, or concoction of, information that purports to expose excesses and war crimes, needs to be looked at carefully.
Finally, and importantly, one must ask the question: which countries have a proven record and history of conducting false flag operations to achieve their strategic aims. In fact, it is to Kevin Barrett that we owe the innovation of a quick response to official lies pertaining to false flag or concocted operations. He started off by producing We Are Not Charlie Hebdo within weeks of the Charlie Hebdo murders. And then, within a few weeks of the Paris attacks of 2013, he produced Another French False Flag? Bloody Tracks From Paris to San Bernardino. The reason this is mentioned here is due to the fact that it was this book that first brought out that teams of actors were involved in staging mock events that were then recorded and presented to the world as horrific events. These were all lies and it was the work of scholars collected by Kevin Barrett that brought this new tactic of propaganda out in the open. As Ole Dammegard told Kevin Barrettt :
“And I have come to realise after thirty years of deep investigation, that what we are seeing is like a theatre group on a global terror tour being used by the powers behind the New World Order. I believe we’re seeing the same people running around in SWAT team uniforms in Paris, Ottawa, Sydney, Copenhagen and so on. The same crisis actors, the same media people in the background, the same marketing agencies, the same directors. We’re looking at a small group, like a rock group on a global tour, repeating the same performance again and again and again, flown from country to country in military planes, then being transported to locations in buses helped by local back-ups. I spoke to CIA whistle blower Chip Tatum about this, and he said it’s not only possible, it’s very probable.”
The same fakery and deception will appear in connection with some of the Syrian events, as has been demonstrated by the impeccable work of the British journalist Robert Stuart which will be referred to later in this article.
The Events of 2013
It will help us understand things better if we go back to 2013 when the first allegations of the use of chemical weapons by Syria were levelled by the “West”. When the 2013 allegation was levelled by the U.S. government, and a military response was contemplated, Donald Trump warned President Obama against attacking Syria. In fact, he tweeted “to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria – if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the U.S. gets nothing!” Obama did not attack because the Director National Intelligence James Clapper had emphasised that the charge that Syria used chemical weapons in Ghouta could not be established. The Ghouta chemical attack took place on August 21, 2013. In fact, there were a series of chemical attacks during 2013. The Wikipedia article  on the use of chemical weapons in Syria lists a total of 19 such attacks during 2013. The first attack took place on March 13, 2013 and the last on August 25, 2013. Two attacks during 2012 were also reported, on October 17, and December 23, 2012.
In 2013 the Syrian government was not the only party in the arena that had chemical weapons. The rebels also had access to chemical weapons. There is a connection between access to, and familiarity with, chemical weapons on the part of the rebels and their Western sponsors. A story filed with the CNN on December 9, 2012 by Elsie Labott stated :
“The U.S. and some European Allies were using defence contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday. The training which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapon sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials. The nationality of the trainers was not disclosed, though the officials cautioned against assuming all are American.”
On September 19, 2013, a story filed by CNN’s Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr  also stated clearly that Pentagon was involved in training Al-Qaeda operatives in the handling of chemical weapons. This story was an update of the story filed in 2012 by Elsie Labott. Were the Americans training these rebels to use chemical weapons under the guise of training them to “secure” chemical weapons? Subsequent use of chemical weapons by these so-called rebels makes this highly likely. Was this being done to create a pretext of direct Western military intervention in case the rebels failed to dislodge Assad? At the time the Russians had not yet arrived on the scene.
In 2013 a UN mission investigated whether or not the Syrian government had employed chemical weapons during various chemical attacks. Carla del Ponto, a member of the UN mission, told Swiss-Italian TV in early May 2013, that there were “strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof” that the rebels had employed chemical weapons . The mission conducted interviews with victims, doctors, and field hospitals in neighbouring countries. Carla del Ponto also added: “According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated.” When on May 5, 2013 Carla del Ponto talked to the Swiss-Italian TV, a total of 12 chemical attacks between March 13, 2013 and April 29, 2013 had been reported. The sources reporting these cases were mostly Western, supplemented by their allies in the Middle East. The March 2013 attack was reported by the UK government, the March 14 attack by Le Monde, one of the two March 19 attacks was reported by the Governments of France and UK, the March 24 attack by the UK government, the attacks of 11 and 12 April by Le Monde, one attack of 13 April by the US government and the other by the French government, the 14 April attack by the French government, the attack of April 25, 2013 by the UK government, and the attack of April 29, 2013 was reported by the governments of France and UK. An earlier attack of March 19, 2013 was reported by the governments of Syria, Russia, France, UK and the US and confirmed by the UN. Subsequently, perhaps because of the pressure exerted by the U.S. and its allies, the UN mission stated that it had “not reached conclusive findings” and was therefore not in a position to comment further on the matter. Carla del Ponto, a former Swiss attorney-general and a member of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, however never withdrew her statement.
The observations of Carla del Ponto were further strengthened when it was discovered that the Daily Mail had, as early as January 29, 2013, published a story by Louise Boyle [14,15] that the U.S. “Backed Plan to Launch Chemical Weapon Attack on Syria and Blame it on Assad’s Regime.” This story was based on leaked emails exchanged between two senior officers of a British defence contractor. The emails were exchanged between Phillip Doughty, the founder of a company named Britam, and Britam’s Business Development Director David Goulding. The emails revealed that Qatar, which of is practically under U.S. control, would provide the funds, and that the money being offered was “enormous.” The story also points out that Britam’s officials had not responded to queries by the reporter. The story was removed from the web without any reason being assigned. The removal indicates that pressure had been exerted on the paper by British and U.S. authorities. However, the story, which was filed before the 2013 chemical attacks took place, was not recanted or withdrawn or disowned by either the reporter or by the paper. The removal of the story from the web archives of the paper without any explanation is itself highly significant. Unfortunately for the U.S. and U.K. authorities, the web makes copies of items and even after the original is removed or deleted, these copies remain accessible and can be retrieved.
What was revealed about the U.S. involvement through the hacking of emails of the British defence contractor Britam, was also confirmed by another hacking activity. The hacked correspondence between Col. Anthony Jamie MacDonald and his colleague Eugene Furth seemed to indicate that the U.S. was involved in planning, aiding and abetting the 2013 attack  and Col. Anthony Jamie MacDonald was, at that time, the general staff director, operations and plans office of the deputy chief of staff for intelligence. The story was dug out by investigative journalist Janet Phelan for Activist Post. The identity of Col. MacDonald and his assignment was not denied by the authorities. On August 22, one day after the two deadly August 21 attacks, Col. MacDonald received an email from his colleague Eugene Furst congratulating him on a “successful operation” and a link to an article on Eastern Ghouta in the Washington Post.
In both attacks Sarin gas is said to have been used and, according to the Wikipedia article, the attacks known as Ghouta chemical attacks led to 734 casualties in one case and 104 in the other. The Wikipedia article mentions that attacks were reported by multiple UN member states and gives the same 4 references for each of the attacks. One of these is Foreign Policy magazine, one is a Human Rights Watch report, one is a UN Human Rights Commission report (41 pages) and the fourth source is an 85-page document including a 3-page letter by Ban ki Moon to Presidents of UN General Assembly and Security Council and a report of the UN Mission that investigated allegations of use of chemical weapons. On page 8 of this document the source is again cited as “multiple member states”. Why are the names of the member states which reported the use of chemical weapons missing from all these documents? Except for the August 21, 2013 Ghouta attacks, the Wikipedia article cites sources which mention the names of countries and/or organizations reporting the use of chemical weapons in every attack.
A Human Rights Watch Report states :
“On the morning of August 21, 2013, dozens of videos began appearing on YouTube channels associated with the Syrian opposition showing large numbers of dead people, the victims of what the opposition claimed was a chemical weapons attack. The footage also showed many hospitalized victims who seemed to be suffering from symptoms from such an attack. Large numbers of dead animals, including sheep, dogs, cats, and wild birds, were also visible in the videos uploaded by the activists. As more details became available, it became clear that the attack had affected two separate opposition-controlled districts in Damascus Suburbs governorate, located 16 kilometers apart. According to local residents, the Zamalka neighborhood in Eastern Ghouta was struck by rockets at some time between 2 and 3 a.m., and the Moadamiya neighborhood in Western Ghouta was struck by rockets at about 5 a.m., shortly after the completion of the Muslim morning prayer.”
These so called opposition groups are agents of the U.S.-U.K.-Israel alliance. According to Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat, writing on March 25, 2013 :
“In December of last year we revealed that the rebels had in their hands potent chemical weapons and were testing them on rabbits, and we predicted that they will use them on innocents. Well now it is happening. And now, new evidence translated from Arabic sources reveals the likelihood that it was the Muslim rebels (FSA) and not the Assad regime that carried out a chemical attack on the town of Khan al-Assal, west of Aleppo. We have captured clips that were never translated (until now) showing rebels revealing heavy arsenals including weapons of mass destruction that contain chemical agents.”
It is surprising that Google has terminated Theodore Shoebat’s you tube account chronicling video evidence of chemical weapons being used by the rebels in the above cited article. If one clicks on the videos in the March 2013 article by Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat, one gets the following remarks from google on a blank screen: “This video is private” or “This video is unavailable.” This action on the part of Google, which works hand in glove with the U.S. agencies, in itself indicates that the videos had important content that falsified the “official” or MSM narrative and exposed the real perpetrators of chemical weapon attacks. Why else would Google terminate videos depicting an important aspect of a scenario that could lead to wider war? Wider war is the agenda of the NAZIs (Neocon-American-Zionists-Imperialists), as revealed by General Wesley Clark.
Oxford historian Mark Almond talked to RT on August 23, 2013 explaining the reasons behind the condemnation of Assad by Western governments despite lack of evidence in the following words :
“In part it is because key Western governments, America, Britain and France, want to say “Gotcha”. They have been demanding the fall of Assad for more than two-and-a-half years now and it has become increasingly frustrating that his regime has shown much more resilience that they had expected, despite the resources that they and the Gulf Kingdoms have thrown into the war on the other side.”
It is also like a distraction from the embarrassment of Egypt, where we see the European and the US governments basically using weasel words to avoid any kind of condemnation of a massacre in the streets of Cairo. So there are both the specifics of Syria and the context of what is going on elsewhere in the Arab world, especially in Egypt.
In 2013 there was tremendous pressure for U.S. military intervention but since it could not be established that the Syrians had used chemical weapons, President Obama backed off much to the chagrin of the NAZI (Neocon-American-Zionist-Imperialist) forces. By 2015 the ISIS had established control over large areas of Syria and Iraq announcing the establishment of an “Islamic Caliphate” forcing the Russians to intervene militarily in September 2015. There is no doubt that entire gamut of “Islamic” fighter organizations from Al-Qaeda to ISIS are created and backed by the U.S.-UK-Israel alliance for the purpose of providing pretexts for intervention in resource-rich and/or strategically located Muslim countries and utterly destroying these societies as a part of the Malthusian genocidal frame of mind of the NAZIs (Neocon-Zionist-American-Imperialists).
It was in 2013 that the Times of Israel reported the Syrian claim, along with photographs showing Israeli weapons that had been captured from the rebels . Garikai Chengu, a research scholar at Harvard University, had, in an incisive article published in 2014 , clearly stated that the US had created Al-Qaeda and ISIS/ISIL. Israel has admitted to providing medical treatment to Syrian rebels on humanitarian grounds! Israeli weapons were recovered from rebels very recently, in May 2017, after they had been defeated by Assad’s army . As early as December 2015 the Daily Mail had reported that Israeli soldiers were rescuing wounded ISIS/Al-Qaeda etc. fighters from the battle zone and had raised the question as to why was Israel rescuing its sworn enemies! In an updated version of the same story posted on 7 February 2017 the newspaper had the following bullet sub-headings :
“Elite Israeli troops rescue wounded Syrians from the world’s worst war almost every night
They have saved more than 2,000 people since 2013, at a cost of 50 million shekels (£8.7million)
Many are enemies of Israel and some may even be fighters for groups affiliated to Al Qaeda
MailOnline embedded with Israeli commandos stationed on the border between Israel and Syria
Dramatic video filmed by MailOnline and the Israeli army shows these operations taking place
Israel says that the operation is purely humanitarian but analysts believe Israel also has strategic reasons”
In any case General Flynn, head of DIA, had told Aljazeera that the President Obama had decided deliberately to send ISIS to overthrow Assad. So we have it from the horse’s mouth. Very recently the Iranians have asserted that they have evidence establishing that the US is supporting ISIS/ISIL. RT, (and other outlets) reported on June 11, 2017 :
“Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mostafa Izadi on Sunday accused the US of supporting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), stating Tehran has evidence to back the bold allegations.”
The U.S.-Israeli-U.K. support of ISIS et al has now become quite open and known.
An extremely important development with regard to the 2013 propaganda campaign against the Syrian government pertains to the BBC Panorama programme “Saving Syria’s Children” aired on the very date and the very time when the British Parliament was debating whether or not to attack Syria (August 29, 2013). The dedicated work of the British journalist Robert Stuart has exposed the entire program as an utter fakery [25,26]. So thorough has been his work that the BBC footage has been removed from you tube records! The BBC program claimed that the Syrian air force had dropped napalm or some similar incendiary bombs on school children on August 26, 2013. Everyone must watch the you tube presentation of Robert Stuart to see how teams of actors are employed to simulate events that have not taken place and presented to the world as horrific atrocities. So we repeatedly come across Western propaganda that has been exposed by assiduous researchers as nothing but lies and fabrications. However, there is no room for such honest news in most of the MSM; no wonder Paul Craig Roberts calls them presstitutes!
The Events of 2017
The Russian intervention in Syria changed the military situation drastically. With Russian help the Syrian government was able to turn the tide and the U.S.-U.K.-Israel agenda of regime change in Syria through ISIS et al received serious setbacks. This is an important factor to be kept in view when evaluating charges by the U.S. and it’s allies that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its own citizens in 2017. When the Russians intervened militarily in 2015, the ISIS/ISIL was stealing oil worth $3 million per day. The Russian air attacks led to a drop in the oil theft to $1.5 million per day. The serious damage inflicted by the Russians on ISIS/ISIL derailed the U.S.-U.K.-Israel plans for complete dismemberment of Syria and for regime change in whatever was left under the control of Assad.
When the U.S. government alleged that chemical weapons had been employed by the Syrian government in April 2017 the now controversial organization White Helmets was involved in initiating and promoting that claim. It was White Helmets that began transmitting video clips and photographs of victims in great distress on April 4, 2017. These disturbing pictures were widely projected on U.S. media speedily. The very next day, on April 5, 2017 Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. threatened that if the U.N. did not take action against the Syrian government the U.S. would be “compelled” to take its own action. Such a statement was not a very responsible statement because the veracity of these pictures could not possibly have been checked within 24 hours for Nikki Haley to issue such a statement. And, in any case, pictures do not constitute proof.
The threat made by ambassador Nikki Haley was based first and foremost on the pictures that were transmitted by White Helmets. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to take a good look at who created the White Helmets and who funds them. That will help in clarifying for whom do they really work. Max Blumenthal has closely analysed the White Helmets in a two-part article posted in October 2016 [27,28]. He writes :
“But like the Syria Campaign, the White Helmets are anything but impartial. Indeed, the group was founded in collaboration with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s Office of Transitional Initiatives, an explicitly political wing of the agency that has funded efforts at political subversion in Cuba and Venezuela. USAID is the White Helmet’s principal funder, committing at least $23 million to the group since 2013. This money was part of $339.6 million budgeted by USAID for ‘supporting activities that pursue a peaceful transition to a democratic and stable Syria’ – – or establishing a parallel governing structure that could fill the power vacuum once Bashar Al-Assad was removed.”
Everyone dealing with such matters knows that USAID functions as a front for the CIA and it is an established fact that USAID works with and for the CIA on a worldwide basis. The very involvement of the USAID sponsored White Helmets in communicating photographs, the speed with which these were projected by the corporate media onto TV screens worldwide and in the major newspapers, and the almost instantaneous statement of Nikki Haley in the U.N. followed, within 24 hours, by an illegal U.S. attack on Syria in violation of international law leaves little doubt to the trained mind that the entire matter is highly suspect, to say the least.
In October 2016 the Threshold Foundation, which was one of the major sponsors of the Netflix documentary on White Helmets, withdrew its funding. The Threshold Foundation issued the following statement which has been quoted in a report by 21st Century Wire editor Vanessa Beeley :
“We have since learned that the subject of the film (the White Helmets organisation) and others involved in this film are advocating for strategies that could entail international military force and escalated violence. Given the military force and violent strategies that do not align with Threshold values, we state that while we support the work of filmmakers, we do not support militaristic responses. Rather, we stand by peaceful means to peaceful ends and answers to conflict that are rooted in respect for human life.”
Vanessa Beeley (see ref. 29) was told by Syrian Arab Red Crescent Workers that “they had never seen the White Helmets conducting humanitarian work in East Aleppo, either during or after occupation by extremist groups.” According to a video compilation of testimonies of those Syrian civilians released from a five year incarceration by Al-Qaeda et al in East Aleppo it is clear that these organisations are built and supported by the U.S., Israel and the U.K. and that the White Helmets are merely “Nusra Front’s civil defence.”
When the U.S. and its allies charged the Syrian government with using chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun on April 4, 2017, the Russians defended Syria by pointing out that Syrian air force had hit a building which, among other things, stored toxic materials. On April 5, 2017, Business Insider reported the Russian Defence Ministry as having stated the following : “According to the objective data of the Russian airspace control, Syrian aviation struck a large terrorist warehouse near Khan Shaykhun that housed a warehouse making bombs, with toxic substances.” The Russian explanation was attacked, rejected and ridiculed by the Zionist-controlled U.S. leadership and media immediately.
However, in a deeply researched story published by the veteran journalist Seymour Hersh, who broke the My Lai massacre story during the Vietnam era, the Russian explanation was, according to his communications with the intel community and other insiders, supported by the U.S. agencies. Seymour Hersh had to publish his story in a German outlet on account of the fact that it challenged the official and MSM narrative about the incident. Hersh writes :
“The available intelligence made clear that the Syrians had targeted a jihadist meeting site on April 4 using a Russian-supplied guided bomb equipped with conventional explosives. Details of the attack, including information on its so-called high-value targets, had been provided by the Russians days in advance to American and allied military officials in Doha, whose mission is to coordinate all U.S., allied, Syrian and Russian Air Force operations in the region.”
Hersh writes that senior members of the intelligence and military community were dismayed that Trump could not be persuaded despite intense briefings that the Syrians had not used chemical weapons. Hersh points to a “complete disconnect” between President Trump and “many of his military advisers and intelligence officials, as well as officers on the ground in the region who had an entirely different understanding of the nature of Syria’s attack on Khan Sheikhoun. I was provided with evidence of that disconnect, in the form of transcripts of real-time communications, immediately following the Syrian attack on April 4.”
It is therefore clear that the U.S. intel and military community knew, and tried to persuade Trump, that the Syrians had not used chemical weapons. Their understanding supported the Russian narrative of what had happened. Why then did Trump attack? Was he convinced that the Syrians had used chemical weapons or are there some other motives? If he was convinced of Syrian guilt then who convinced him? Or did he order the attack despite knowing that the Syrians were not guilty. If so, what could be the motive? Larry Chin wrote :
“National Security Advise H.R. McMaster and Defence Secretary Mattis pushed for the strike. White House advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka Trump reportedly also pushed for strike. White House advisor Steve Bannon advised against the strike, and was rebuked.”
Larry Chin has also emphasised that videos and pictures showing White Helmets in a lead role “point to a setup using tired old tricks. A repeat of previous similar staged “humanitarian crisis” pretexts from “incubator babies” to “Aleppo Boy”. Elements of the current Syria Hoax include clumsy staging of the chemical attack, dead and injured people laughing (because they don’t think cameras are running), actors playing “dead children” opening their eyes.”
In an important piece Gordon Duff, Senior Editor of Veterans Today (VT), has confirmed U.S. complicity in Khan Shaykhun (Idlib province) gas attack . No wonder the VT website was hit with a cyber attack as VT was about to expose U.S. planning behind the gas attack. British intelligence agent Michael Shrimpton has pointed out that a WMD attack by Syria would have to be cleared with Moscow and that there was no evidence that Moscow even knew of the attack . Gordon Duff has also pointed out that a Malaysian hacker has also published proof of Khan Shaykhun planning by opposition groups to carry out the attack and blame it on Assad . According to this hacker the rebels already knew of a chemical attack that would take place on April 4, 2017 and were preparing to film it!
Dr. Theodore Postol, Professor Emeritus at MIT, has subjected the White House report on the April 4, 2017 incident, and the available evidence, to close scrutiny. He states (emphasis in original) :
“I have reviewed the document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the U.S. government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of chemical attacks in Khan Shaykhun, Syria at roughly 6 to 7 a.m. on April 4, 2017.”
Professor Postol also emphasises, from the available pictures, that there was no evidence that the munition that dispersed the gas was dropped from the sky and that there was a high probability that it had been placed by someone on the ground. The analysis by a Professor from one of the topmost institutions of the world deals a death blow to the White House spin on the matter.
One may therefore ask the question: who benefits from a chemical attack on the citizens of Syria? The Government of Bashar al Assad or the rebels and their backers? The NAZIs (Neocon-American-Zionist-Imperialists) have been itching for a pretext to destroy Syria and to replace Bashar al Assad. A chemical attack would provide the perfect pretext for attacking Syria because the ISIS et al are losing the battle despite receiving all possible support from the U.S., Israel, U.K. and Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Assad and Russia were blamed instantly and worldwide by the Zionist controlled Western media even though there was no evidence for blaming Syria and Russia for this attack. Ian Greenhalgh wrote an article for Veterans Today as recently as June 12, 2017 with the apt title : “The US support of ISIS is becoming obvious.”
Richard Black, Virginia State Senator, provided a powerful answer to the question cui bono when he told RT (I have transcribed the comments) :
“I was the top prosecutor for the Pentagon and as a criminal expert you always look for motive and I defy anyone, anyone, in the media to give me a motive for why would Syria use poison gas against the rebels? Now why would Assad snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Both attacks are similar in this respect: they involve civilians not military people. Why in the midst of all these battles would Assad choose to attack civilians rather than military people. It is simply irrational. Now look at the evidence. Again, as a prosecutor, I want to look at the evidence. We are relying strictly on evidence that is propagated by terrorists – one of them are the White Helmets an arm of Al Qaeda. Why would we take the word of terrorists who murdered 3000 Americans on 9/11? Now we know that in 2013 Turkey helped move Sarin gas into Syria and they were involved in the attack on Damascus. What would be the motive of Syria in attacking a group of women and children. What’s the purpose? I defy any of the mainstream media as to give me one good sound reason why President Assad would launch a sarin gas attack against the terrorists whom he is defeating everywhere on the battlefield?”
In the same youtube posting former UK Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, also raised the question: Who benefits? He went on to say (I have transcribed his remarks)
“Clearly it’s not the Syrian regime or Russians that’s benefitting. I believe it is highly unlikely that either were behind what’s happened. There are different possibilities. One of it is that All of it is fake news the images and videos the information all come from opposition sources and not from any credible independent journalists. It’s also possible that the pictures show the aftermath of a bombing attack which happened to hit a jihadi chemical weapons munition dump. We know for a fact that the jihadis were storing chemical weapons in schools in Eastern Aleppo because these were seen later by Western journalists. . . . Aleppo we were told that there was a holocaust going on, massacres. Didn’t happen. Independent reporters went in afterwards and saw no evidence of massacres. What we did see was fighters being bust out quietly, and we discovered subsequently that a lot of the footage was fake.”
In the same RT program a clip showed Seymour Hersh making an important observation. He pointed out that the sarin that Syrian army has a different chemical component than the sarin that would be made by Al Nusra. He pointed out that someone must have looked at it and he could not understand why no one was talking about it. This is something that is surely known to experts who had analysed the samples given to them. Had the Syrians used sarin these experts would have taken no time to point it out. They did not and that says a lot about Syrian innocence. The attack on Syria makes Trump, the fifth U.S. President in a row to qualify for the title of war criminal.
REFERENCES AND ENDNOTES
 OPCW Fact-Finding Mission Confirms Use of Chemical Weapons in Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017; 30 June 2017, https://www.opcw.org/news/article/opcw-fact-finding-mission-confirms-use-of-chemical-weapons-in-khan-shaykhun-on-4-april-2017/
 Stephen Lendman: Fallout from OPCW Report on Syria Chemical Weapons Fabricating Evidence, Contrived Narrative, Trump Playing With Fire; Global Research, July 5, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/fallout-from-opcw-report-on-syria-chemical-weapons-fabricating-evidence-contrived-narrative-trump-playing-with-fire/5597371?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles
 SANA Syrian Arab News Agency: Foreign Ministry: OPCW Report Has No Credibility and Cannot be accepted, July 1, 2017; http://sana.sy/en/?p=109165
 Seymour M. Hersch: Trump’s Red Line; https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article165905578/Trump-s-Red-Line.html
 General Wesley Clark and Amy Goodman: Global Warfare: “We’re going to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran..” http://www.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166 Source: Democracy Now, 2 March 2007
 Douglas Reed: The Controversy of Zion, Bridger House Publishing, 2012, p 343
 Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor: Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, Mainstream Publishing 2013. The very first sentence of this books is: “The history of the First World War is a deliberately concocted lie.”
 Paul Craig Roberts: Putin’s Assessment of Trump at G-20 Will Determine Our Future; July 7, 2017; http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/07/07/putins-assessment-trump-g-20-will-determine-future/
 Kevin Barrett (Editor): Another French False Flag? Bloody Tracks From Paris to San Bernardino, Sifting and Winnowing Books, 2016, p 249
 Wikipedia: Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
 Elise Labott: Sources: U.S. helping underwrite Syrian rebel training on securing chemical weapons; December 9, 2012, http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/09/sources-defense-contractors-training-syrian-rebels-in-chemical-weapons/
 Barbara Starr: Pentagon proposes training moderate Syrian rebels; September 19, 2013; http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/18/politics/us-syria-training/index.html
 UN’s Del Ponte says evidence Syria rebels ‘used sarin’, BBC May 6, 2013 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22424188
 Gordon Duff: 2013 Daily Mail Article “US to Stage Chemical Warfare Attack … Blame Assad”; Veterans Today, April 13, 2017; http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/13/2013-daily-mail-article-us-to-stage-chemical-warfare-attack-blame-assad-censored/
 In 2013 U.S. “Backed Plan to Launch Chemical Weapon Attack on Syria and Blame it on Assad’s Regime” April 6, 2017, http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-04-06/in-2013-u-s-backed-plan-to-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-on-syria-and-blame-it-on-assads-regime/
 Janet Phelan: Questions Arise As To Defence Contractor Involvement in Syrian Gas Attack, Activist Post, September 6, 2013, http://www.activistpost.com/2013/09/questions-arise-as-to-defense.html
Mariam al-Hijab: Chemical Attack in Idlib – Duplication of Scenario in Eastern Ghouta; Global Research, April 10, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/chemical-attack-in-idlib-duplication-of-scenario-in-eastern-ghouta/5584281 ;
Also appeared in Teheran Times, April 10, 2017; https://www.pressreader.com/iran/tehran-times/20170410/281835758560379
17] Human Rights Watch Report: Attacks on Ghouta: Analysis of Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria, September 10, 2013; https://www.hrw.org/report/2013/09/10/attacks-ghouta/analysis-alleged-use-chemical-weapons-syria
 Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat: Alarming Footage: Syrian Rebels Use Chemical Weapons; 25 March, 2013,
Also see: Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack: Evidence: Syrian Rebels Used Chemical Weapons (Not Assad), August 27, 2013; http://shoebat.com/2013/08/27/evidence-syrian-rebels-used-chemical-weapons-not-assad/
 RT: Syrian rebels control alleged chemical attack site: Govt can’t grant secure entry; 23 August 2013; https://www.rt.com/op-edge/syria-chemical-attack-opposition-control-869/
 Elhanan Miller: Syria says it captured Israeli weapons from rebels – Regime forces say they foiled attack near Idlib by fighters carrying foreign passports; Times of Israel, 21 August 2013; http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-says-it-captured-israeli-weapons-from-rebels/
 Garikai Chengu: America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group; Global Research, 9 September 2014, reposted May 23, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881
 Samer Hussain: US and Israeli-Made Weapons in the Hands of ISIS Terrorists, Discovered by Syrian Government Forces; Global Research May 26, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-and-israeli-made-weapons-in-hands-of-isis-terrorists-discovered-by-syrian-government-forces/5591949
 Jake Wallis Simons: Saving their sworn enemy: Heartstopping footage shows Israeli commandos rescuing wounded men from Syrian warzone – but WHY are they risking their lives for Islamic militants? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3315347/Watch-heart-pounding-moment-Israeli-commandos-save-Islamic-militants-Syrian-warzone-risking-lives-sworn-enemies.html#ixzz4mSLOxnUy
 Iran accuses US of alliance with ISIS, claims to have proof; 11 June 2017; https://www.rt.com/news/391879-iran-claims-has-proof-us-alliance-isis/
 ROBERT STUART PRESENTATION ON BBC PANORAMA ‘SAVING SYRIA’S CHILDREN’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu6TlmHnd4c
 Evidence of Fakery in BBC “Saving Syria’s Children” Is Now Undeniable; ; June 16, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-of-fakery-in-bbc-saving-syrias-children-is-now-undeniable/5594917
 Max Blumenthal: How the White Helmets Became International Heroes While Pushing U.S. Military Intervention and Regime Change in Syria; October 2, 2016; http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/how-white-helmets-became-international-heroes-while-pushing-us-military
 Max Blumenthal: Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria; October 3, 2016; http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria
 Vanessa Beeley: Did the CIA set up the White Helmets to control the war crime scenes throughout the Syrian theatre of war? March 1, 2107; http://themillenniumreport.com/2017/03/did-the-cia-set-up-the-white-helmets-to-control-the-war-crime-scenes-throughout-the-syrian-theater-of-war/
 Natasha Bertrand: An ‘infantile argument’: Experts pour cold water on Russia’s ‘fanciful’ explanation for Syrian gas attack; Business Insider, http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-explanation-for-syria-chemical-weapons-attack-2017-4
 Ref. 4
 Larry Chin: The Trump/Syria Conundrum: Will Trump Deliver Deep State’s World War? Global Research April 12, 2017; http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-trump-syria-conundrum-will-trump-deliver-deep-states-world-war/5584702
 Gordon Duff: Breaking VT Hit With Stuxnet as Trump’s Complicity in Gas Attack is Confirmed; Veterans Today, April 15, 2017, http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/15/vt-hit-with-stuxnet-as-trumps-complicity-in-gas-attack-is-confirmed/
 Michael Shrimpton: False Flag attack on Khan Shaykhun; Veterans Today, April 14, 2017; http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/14/false-flag-attack-on-khan-shaykhun/
 GPD (Gordon P. Duff): Malaysian Hacker Publishes Proof of Khan Shaykhun Attack Planning; Veterans Today, April 13, 2017; http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/04/13/malaysian-hacker-publishes-proof-of-khan-shaykhun-attack-planning/
 Theodore Postol: Assessment of White House Intelligence Report About Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria, Global Research, April 13, 2017, http://www.globalresearch.ca/assessment-of-white-house-intelligence-report-about-nerve-agent-attack-in-khan-shaykhun-syria/5584867
 Ian Greenhalgh: The US support of ISIS is Becoming Too Obvious; Veterans Today, June 12, 2017; http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/06/12/the-us-support-of-isis-is-becoming-obvious/
 Israel Wants to Create World War III; 8 April, 2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgzQViqWJr4
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.